UNHCR RETURNEE MONITORING REPORT AFGHANISTAN REPATRIATION JANUARY 2002 – MARCH 2003 TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary 2 1 Overview of Protection and Human Rights Concerns 6 1.1 Physical Security and Rule of Law 7 1.2 Returnee Reintegration and Sustainability of Return 8 1.3 Legal and Material Safety 12 1.4 Cross Cutting Issues 20 2 Strategies for Intervention 28 2.1 Capacity Building of Authorities 28 2.2 Information Sharing and Partnership 29 2.3 Advocacy 29 2.4 Mediation and Reconciliation 31 3 Reintegration Challenges 32 3.1 Establishing the Rule of Law 32 3.2 Solving Disputes over Land 32 3.3 Fostering Rural Development 33 3.4 Rebuilding Shelters and Water Sources 33 3.5 Providing Social Services 33 3.6 Integrating a Gender Approach 33 3.7 Supporting the Reintegration of Groups with Special Needs 34 3.8 Showing Quick Results and Highlighting the Impact of Interventions 34 4 Conclusions and Recommendations 34 4.1 Information Collection and Dissemination 34 4.2 Capacity Building 35 4.3 Support Strategy on Violence against Women 36 2 UNHCR RETURNEE MONITORING REPORT AFGHANISTAN REPATRIATION JANUARY 2002 – MARCH 2003 Executive Summary Afghanistan witnessed one of the largest repatriation movements in 2002, with more than 1.8 million refugees and some 600,000 internally displaced persons (IDPs) returning voluntarily to re-establish their lives. Afghanistan’s Ministry of Refugees and Repatriation (MoRR), UNHCR and its partners facilitated the voluntary return operation and provided initial reintegration support. Legal framework The Presidential Decree on the Dignified Return of Refugees, issued in June 2002, serves as the main legal framework to ensure that the basic rights of returnees are recognised and that the voluntary character of return is respected. Steps toward compliance with this Decree and support to the Afghan Government to promote protection through monitoring of returnees’ basic rights were initiated in accordance with the provisions of the Bonn Agreement (Governance Section). Tripartite agreements on voluntary repatriation were negotiated with neighbouring countries hosting large communities of Afghan citizens, in particular Iran and Pakistan. A Joint Agreement was signed in April 2002 with the Islamic Republic of Iran and provided the legal framework for the voluntary return of more than 300,000 persons until March 2003. According to the Iranian interpretation of the agreement, only the 2.3 million registered Afghans living in Iran were covered by the agreement and consequently around 40,000 non-registered Afghan citizens were deported in 2002. Despite the 1.5 million Afghans who returned to Afghanistan from Pakistan, negotiations on a tripartite agreement only bore fruit in early 2003. Other Tripartite Agreements were concluded in the fall of 2002 and spring of 2003 with non-neighbouring countries hosting Afghan citizens such as France, the United Kingdom and the Netherlands. Protection outreach and network UNHCR and its partners, which include government and non-government bodies and United Nations agencies, established a returnee monitoring network in June 2002, which covered most provinces of Afghanistan. This extensive and geographically broad network was part of an overall effort to support the newly created government structures in ensuring the protection of returnees and IDPs, and their socio-economic reintegration into communities of their choice. First steps to build confidence were taken through regular meetings with local authorities and community leaders in returnee areas. In some locations, this led to the establishment of good relations with authorities and resulted in some direct and indirect interventions. Some 4,000 missions to returnee villages were conducted to interview local leaders and both male and female groups and individuals to obtain a better understanding of their 3 current problems, to direct appropriate programme interventions, and, in cases of violations, to intervene on their behalf. This first returnee monitoring report is a summary of the findings of these monitoring missions. It highlights the challenges faced by returnees to Afghanistan and provides basic information on conditions in places of origin for refugees and IDPs (as potential returnees) and for relevant authorities in countries of asylum. General conclusions Reasons for return to Afghanistan were often cited as the improved social, economic, security and human rights conditions. The fundamental change in the political and security environment provided opportunities not seen for the past 23 years. The presence of International Security Assistance Force and many international actors in Kabul provided a level of security and economic opportunity that contributed to relative stability in the capital. This factor partly accounts for the high level of return to the greater Kabul area (46 per cent of the total). However, many refugees and IDPs actually originated from these areas. The majority of returnees were families returning to their places of origin, having left Afghanistan during the Taliban period (61 per cent). A further 27 per cent had fled during the Soviet occupation and the Najibullah regime (1980-1992); 6 per cent left during the Mujahedin period (1992 – 1996); 4 per cent had fled before 1980 and 2 per cent in early 2002. Overall, returnees have been able to return to their communities of origin and have faced no discrimination on the basis of their returnee status. Post-conflict recovery presents challenges that are shared equally by returnees and settled members of communities. Nevertheless, a number of critical concerns were identified and are detailed below. Monitoring at border crossing points, encashment and distribution centers were some of the tools used to assess the dynamics of return and the motivations of those returning voluntarily, as the returnees entered Afghanistan. The vast majority of deportees from Pakistan and Iran were single men arrested for lack of valid documentation or illegal entry, but whole families who had been actually resident in the countries of asylum were also deported, as well as a limited number of individuals holding documentation. Concerns about deportation cases were continuously raised with authorities in Pakistan and Iran. Key concerns Slow economic development and lack of job opportunities: Although of common to all Afghans, these concerns contribute to the risk of renewed displacement, reverse movements and unsustainable return. Lack of security: This results from the absence of rule of law and the limited outreach of the central authority. Tribal and traditional dispute settlement mechanisms have not been able to function adequately where local “commanderism” still prevails. Provincial institutions are still fragile and are currently unable to provide effective administrative and judicial structures. The delay in the demobilization and disarmament process has perpetuated the presence and influence of local commanders and armed elements, who commit acts of extortion, harassment, arbitrary and private detention, forcible military 4 recruitment, sexual abuse and kidnapping against civilians. Several surveys of Afghans in Pakistan indicate that inadequate security is the most significant deterrent to return. Problems with repossession of land and property: A key impediment to return has been the non-restitution of land and property. Evidenced in almost every province, this is often symptomatic of control by illegal armed elements of land and water resources. Mechanisms for dispute settlement are weakened by external pressures which prevent fair and objective justice. Limited access to water due to drought or illegal control by armed groups, and to social services such as education and health: Some returnees have complained specifically about the lack and poor standards of maternity services. Gender- and child-related concerns: The widespread absence of livelihood security has caused or may cause new displacement of men and adolescents, leaving women and children susceptible to physical abuse and social vulnerability. Respect for human rights and dignity are undermined in specific locations by the harassment of men, sexual and gender-based violence against women, and forcible recruitment of adolescents by both legal and illegal armed groups. These acts undermine national policies on security, demobilization, and advancement of women. In the same vein there is evidence of multiple and widespread gender-based discrimination against women and girls, including child- marriage and, in some locations, exclusion from education. While unnecessary restrictions on the realization of women’s human rights are inconsistent with current national policies and the aspirations of many female returnees, the link between these facts and the statistics on maternal and infant mortality is a matter of grave concern which undermines national development. Key strategies in 2002 In order to meet the challenges confronting returning populations, UNHCR adopted the following strategies to protect their rights and consolidate their reintegration: Capacity-building of authorities: UNHCR has established linkages at provincial, district and village levels as a valuable mechanism for the identification of and to respond to returnee concerns. UNHCR’s mandate as well as the mandate of the MoRR, the relevant national decrees, and national protection structures have provided a framework for joint action. Information-sharing and partnerships: UNHCR has worked to enhance access to information for